It's insanely rare to find coverage of Chinese arms and doctrines without an unbearable amount of manipulative narration or tone policing. *Refreshing*
It's refreshing to see a video really about PLA structure & equipment, without hearing a india accent talking about any political BS but the real deal.
Please keep doing PLA content, so hard to find it elsewhere. P.s. I don’t know if you’ve considered covering non-ground forces but content on the PLAN/PLAAF/PLARF would also be cool
Its actually not so hard to find info about PLA. You just have to know where to look. The sad news is, most of the sites are blocked by western media and Google.
@@BattleOrder A simple question. How did you manage to acquire such classified information used in the video, that the Chinese government does not disclose?
@@backleft4917 There are plenty of channels in China that are Govt approved and focus on Military stuff, Blogs and such also appear and no you dont get Arrested but it will magically Disappear 😏
@@PlumSack79 If you're so sure the PLA is paper tiger, why comment multiple times throughout this video trying to convince everyone? Sounds to me you aren't actually sure and are trying to convince yourself.
Glad to see PLA and ccp, a paper tiger, is on your mind everyday. It's like chinese talking about india or africa or something. They don't do it because they actually are paper tigers
An excellent look at one of the most relevant militaries in the world. The PLA heavy brigades are truly formidable forces, even if they were to operate under strength. Liked and subscribed, thanks for the great content.
Is it okay to think Chinese Aviation brigades are next?? No one covered that. Chinese Land Forces Aviation units are the only ones that will match US Army Aviation operation modality and size some day.
@@Old-Dog00 yea but it would be good to see american structure utilizing Mi-17 Type helo's. There gotta be significant difference. Chinese tend to put attack capability in all the helicopter's. US too have that, but not in a Chinese extent.
@@BengalLancer Helos are not as important as you make them out bro. The only time they are is during a deep air assault mission and you have hundreds of them transporting troops and material.
Need to give you a thumbs up for providing unbiased briefing about the PLA. For the content although I can't say it is 100% accurate, it is top quality you can find on RU-vid. Must be difficult for a foreigner to collect and translate those materials. One pity thing is that it didn't mention the PCL-181/171/161 howitzer. It is a new star in the army.
@@backleft4917 In the Korean war, Chinese guys are shocked because "These asswhole's bombs seems be free of charge and countless ......" U.S. guys are shocked because "These bastards are just can't be knock down, no matter how many tons of bombs we throw at them, they could always fight back... "
@@obiwankenobi3574 despite popular depiction, the PLA doctrine at the time is more focused on movement warfare, on infiltration through mountainous terrains, envelopment and surrounding the enemy from multiple directions. It’s only later in the war when the US learnt to counter PLA tactics and the war became a stalemate that PLA had to resort to front assault, even then they tried infiltration tactics as much as possible. PLA didn’t like frontal charge either, but sometimes they had to do it, e.g. against surrounded US units who are well supplied by US Airforce.
@@CrasusC Bullshit Look at the Chosin Campaign. Eleven Chinese 'Iron' Divisions, versus one reinforced US Marine Division. The Chinese lost a division a day.
For the reconnaissance battalion, that radar vehicle is based on the ZSD-89A platform, not ZBD-04A. They look similar to each other, but they are different.
I agree, but the hulls are completely different. The ZBD-04 being based on the Type 97, itself heavily influenced by the BMP-3. The Type 89 is more a lengthened Type 63.
@@gizhou3034 I dont understand, ZBD-97 has not so much difference with ZBD-04.(wz502),But i know that ZBD-04A(WZ502G) has additional protection ,more informatization,and removed the propeller.The turrent of both 04/04A is almost same as BMP3,because russian sold one of their production line of BMP3’s turrent.
According to an April 2021 gov article: As of now, there are in total 82 combined brigades: 29 heavy, 25 medium , 17 light, 1 medium/light, 4 mountain, 6 amphibious. Of 29 heavy brigades, 12 are considered “digital combined heavy”. In addition, there are 4 divisions with conventional layout at Xinjiang.
@Rob Wilton Rearming to the teeth? Our military is not very big. Its comparable to France and UK. Example: Turkey has a pretty much bigger military while opposing against the NATO, western values and having a dictator (Erdogan). Germany is a Part of the NATO alliance since the 50's and all NATO Members are forced to Spend 2% of the GDP Into military and Take Part in NATO operations. Germany only spent 1,2%. Neo Nazis are Not a bigger Problem Here than in US or any other countries. We germans know our past and there is no Chance that the AFD or NPD get a majority in the federal election. No Party want sth to do with them. And Japan must protect themself because China become a new dangerous Power in the Region und due Donald Trumps anti NATO / Aliied Rethoric Nobody was Sure that the US would stand this his allies. Its pretty much ignorant to Take Out old Prejudicies while the US, Russia and China terrorizing the world since the Cold war.
@@Jan_Hannibal You said yourself that Germany only spent 1.2% on defense last year, while continuing to flood U.S market with German made cars. You want U.S support in NATO, then please hold up your end of the bargain.
@@DirtyBird28 What does the Export of Cars have to do with a state Budget? Seemingly some americans Like German Cars...so what? That the law of free market In my opinion we should leave NATO and Form a european defense union, because who want to support some illegal Interventions world wide ? But the EU is often a clumsy and incompetent bureaucracy, so they wont realize that.
@@Jan_Hannibal It matters because Germany continues to reap the benefits of access to the American market while still not paying it's fair share of NATO. I could care less what cars people choose to drive. If fact don't buy American, most of our cars are crap right now. But you needn't worry, as you Europeans seen in full display at G7. Our president is an old fumbling buffoon incapable of striking the best deal for U.S. In fact you might be better off coming to terms with the Russians. Putin is currently running circles around us.
@@Jan_Hannibal President Trump worked directly with Japan, and was never anti-NATO. He was anti other-nations-not-paying-their-share-while-the-US-foots-the-bill
The news is that they're now replacing every remaining type 59 unit with type 96 In fact there' even rumour that they will actually adapt the type 96B into the army
In most case , The type 59D 's mission is fill up the shortage number of type 09 8X8 gun carrier in Chinese verision SBCT. But for some troops in Xinjiang(Last four divisions in PLAGF),they are really using Type59-1 and type 63 APC，they are as old as guys in museum, these four divisions are still waiting for the new equipment
@@proletommy7426 well, i mean xinjiang faces a friendly russia, pakistan, a weak mongolia and the stans, with only a tiny portion potentially facing india and that area is getting type-15 .
Correction: Pretty much every vehicle that you said was based on the ZBD-04A hull shown from 2:18 onwards (except the AFT-10 ATGM carrier) is actually based on the modernised ZSD-89 hull. This is a common mistake that many people make. Also, you used some footage of the VT-5 which is not same as the ZTQ-15. Anyways, keep up the good work.
The ZBD-04 hull, is based on the Type 97 hull, which was heavily influenced by the BMP-3. This is not good work as no sources are cited. And it is the Type 04 hull used with Hong jia-10. Unless, 'Tanke Zhuangjia Cheliang', is wrong.
@@gizhou3034 The turret of the original ZBD-04 is certainly from the BMP-3 but the hull is entirely different. It has a non-retarded layout with the engine in the front as opposed to the BMP-3 which has its engine in the back.
Really appreciate your hard work and in depth research! Would you do a video about Chinese Naval equipments and 3 fleets? Chinese naval power is growing so fast and it hard to get a overlook of the entire picture.
@@prind142 by typing gibberish with your made in China keyboard? Destroy your keyboard first. Your hostility is the reason why China made those weapons. The barbaric nature of colonists never changed.
Excellently put together video, it's hard to find precise information on this on one's own so the effort is greatly appreciated. Keep it up. A similar breakdown of Chinese air brigades would be welcome.
damn, I saw a dude in the comment section called the ERA "sheet metal" and claim a .337 mag could penetrate the turret, man, that's a new level of stupidity, a layman should never comment on something that he/she doesn't know anything about, period
Most people seem to think China can only manufacture cheap crap that falls apart after a week. They do make a lot of cheap crap, but that's because companies want their products made for the bare minimum possible. Doesn't mean they can't make high quality stuff, and I'm sure a lot of their equipment is better than 99% of other countries.
While China and Taiwan have been bitter enemies for a while, interestingly their contemporary armies are organized in very similar fashion. At top sits the Corps level HQ, PLAGF calls it group army (集团军), ROC Army uses the term army (军团). Neither armies maintain division, their tactical maneuver units are combined arms brigades. PLA has four types of combat brigades: heavy, medium, light, and amphibious while ROC Army has two: armored, mechanized infantry. Additionally both armies also retain second line combat units. Infantry Brigades in ROC Army. Border defense and coast defense brigades in PLAGF. Within each combat brigade, the basic maneuver battalions share similar name and concept: combined battalion (合成营) in PLA terminology while in Taiwan military it is known as combined arms battalion (联兵营). Again you can see the influences from US Army. PLA group army also commands a fixed types of support brigades: aviation, artillery, air defense, special op, logistics, and engineer/chemical defense. For ROC Army each of her armies has a brigade sized artillery command including air defense battalion plus two regimental sized units called group (群), one for combat engineer and another one is NBC defense. However unlike PLA group army, Taiwanese field army doesn’t have special op nor aviation assets, those are pooled together under a separate Army Aviation and Special Op Command.
Not surprising considering half of the PLA units consist of ancestry from ROC defector divisions and most communist officers and their original divisions were raised by people who graduated from the same Whampoon military academy as the ROC Army.
I would wager that the PLA at all levels have a very healthy level of respect for the strengths of US forces along with their vast experience in combat operations. Its worth baring in mind, prior to US involvement in Europe and the Pacific in World War II, North American forces were also lacking combat experience and came up against battle-hardened adversaries. Lack of respect for one's enemies can compromise the not only the outcome of a battle but an operation and even the war.
The difference was that the Americans had the British to teach them the ropes, but China has to rely on Russia for their combat experience. The same Russia that is currently struggling to defeat Ukraine.
@@ObliviousPenguin How is Russia losing in Ukraine when they've laid waste to the best NATO can muster at the moment? They've only called up 20% of their forces. People like you cheerleading on the sidelines won't help on the battlefield. The Ukrainian government said they are losing up to 1k soldiers a day. Unsustainable rates for Ukraine, wake up please!
@Battle Order A video on Chinese PLA GF's light combined arms/mechanised brigade based on 8x8 and 6x6 wheeled vehicles will be much appreciated, specially describing the deployment of the ZTL 11 assault gun vehicles in their formations.
Yup, this is a very well-made and well-researched video. From this, we get the gist of how structured and modern the PLA is. Whoever thought that China is nothing but a paper tiger is due for a rude awakening.
I agree. Chinese policy is to get the enemy deeper in country. After this who knows what they have in store for the adversary. Pray that Diplomacy will prevail so we don't have to find out.
I actually like the term paper tiger for the PLA. If they were in a position of power then they wouldn't be uttering so many threats against countries. For example threatening Japan with a nuclear attack. Threatening 300,000 Canadians in Hong Kong (to be fair it was a Chinese ambassador that made this threat), flying warplanes through Taiwan airspace and escalating tensions with India as examples. If they were strong they wouldn't resort to biological warfare or attempting to infiltrate countries. Dont get me wrong, their military is up there as one of the strongest in the world. But they are also setting themselves up to be the Axis if a global conflict were to take place. They are alienating themselves. Especially when they ally with terrorists like the Taliban.
@@Amoore-vv9wx The actual definition of a Paper Tiger is "something or someone that claims or appears to be powerful or threatening, but is actually ineffectual and unable to withstand challenge." Seems to sum up the CCP perfectly. I dont see Japan, Taiwan, South Korea or Vietnam uttering threats.
@B J That's just blatantly false. It was a chinese ambassador that threatened 300,000 Canadians in Honk Kong. It is a fact that China is actively threatening Taiwan and increasing aggressive flights with military planes through Taiwan airspace. Xi Jinping has been telling the military and citizens to prepare for war while also pushing anti west propaganda. They openly allied with the Taliban. This is all verifiable fact.
ZBD-86 is more like a mix copy of BMP-1 and BMP-2. It depends on a variant, but from memory most that are in use have 30 mm autocannon or something similar. No 73 mm low pressure cannon. I'm not saying China didn't have them, but they used that platform so much that there are IIRC more than dozen combat versions (to say nothing of specialty versions like ambulances etc.).
Amazing work! It would be nice if you could cover the Chinese Combined Air Assault Brigades next and compare them to the American counterparts. Looking forward to it!
I would love to see a video about the Israeli army or maybe their military production system. They seem like such a unique kinda army and a very stand alone army surrounded by enemies.
The United States uses a BCT system, while a lot of NATO countries like Canada and the U.K use a "battlegroup" system. Its very similar but its usually centered around crating a scalable combat group based on a mechanized or light infantry unit, and then attaching armoured, fires and combat service support as needed. Canada for example organizes their ground forces around a "Mechanized Brigade Group", it incorporates elements of all three BCT from the U.S but is rounded out to face a wide array of threats. Can't say much for Germany or France but I'd imagine they are very similar to the Mechanized Brigade Group.
@@paydenladeroute7129 French army order of battle consists of 6 combined arms brigades: 2 light, 2 medium, and 2 heavy, plus French contribution to the Franco-German Brigade. French combat brigades are larger than their US Army counterpart. For example its armored brigade had over 8000 authorized personnel organized into one tank regiment, one combined arms regiment (both tank and IFV) acting as recon formation, three armored infantry regiments (IFV), one artillery regiment, one engineer regiment, and brigade HHC. But without organic support units. The French Army regiment is slightly larger than US Army battalion.
Love your vids! It would be cool to see videos on more macro levels of military organization, like the CARS-USARS transition, or the fate of the ACR's (Armored Cavalry Regiments).
The verhicles used by units are depent on frontier lvl. Example units facing Taiwan and elite units have they better equipment and verhicles and tanks. Second and reserve units have semi modern equipment mounted on older verhicles/tanks.
Don’t underestimate PLA logistics. This is not your granddaddy’s PLA. China has the largest manufacturing base as well as the most extensive supply chain in the world right now.
@@aps125 yeah no disrepct to the PLA, I didn't mean to come off with a tone. I like logistics, and I'm curious to see how the largest army in the world would get it done if they ever fully mobilized. I'm not doubting China or the PLA, it would be an incredible military achievement for any country
@@jdstark24 IF they can build 10,000km of hsr every 12 months and simultaneously be building 300 dams, 50 nuclear reactors, and over 40 metro systems, they can supply a few thousand pieces of military hardware with ease for as long as they need them operational.
Great video! Very informative and amazing quality! Totally Subscribed! I find it hard to believe that the Battalion Company for the Combined Arms Battalion only having a small 3-man staff. Given the needs for synchronizing operations, communications and all classes of supply in time and space that would be a monumental task for such a small staff. Additionally why would you have a Battalion Staff in a tank? Who would drive? If they did model off the US Army, we have tanks for the Battalion Commander and Battalion Command Sergeant Major. That said the staff is usually in a tent somewhere behind a hill, trying to deconflict Current Operations (CUOPS) and plan and coordinate Future Operations (FUOPS). Moreover with the amount of drones and recon platforms I am curious about the Battalion and Brigade staffs. What are their staff positions? This is supremely important. If they only have a small communications sections inside of the Brigade HQ then they will likely struggle to talk to their subordinate commanders or if their intelligence section is robust it would likely be due to the need to metabolize all that drone footage from all the Recce vehicle drones and organic scout reports. All of this shows HOW they will fight, not just WHAT they will fight with. Some other questions I am interested in: What does their orders process look like? What does their communications architecture / systems look like (HF, FM, Mobile Ad Hoc MESH Networks, Satellite, Tactical Internet)? How many supply vehicles / trucks do they have in each Battalion?
If the C^3I is really integrated, I can see how you could do it with 3 people, especially if it is very centralized at the brigade's higher HQ . . . ..
@@backleft4917 In the days of the regimental system, the command tanks had an extra radio, as the battalion was a tactical unit. The Type 89 armoured command vehicle variant became prominent with change to the brigade and 'modular' units creating task forces, but I expect the commanding officer still rides around in a tank at the headquarters level so two tanks would be the norm.
staff here means staff officer, NCO level staff are not counted here. Of them, one chief staff, one in charge of recon and one in charge of communication. Compared previous system, this is a doubling of commanding officers from just the commander and deputy battalion commander. mil.huanqiu.com/article/9CaKrnJLqp6 In "photo op" staff meetings like this one, there seems to way more than 4 people. (though 4 are the ones standing in front). Note the photo and the article obviously are talking about very different things... mod.gov.cn/big5/power/2017-08/14/content_4788764.htm
From my understanding, no armoured brigade currently have ztz59. ztz99a is not so widely used, and it is usually called ztz99 phase 1/2/3 and ztz99 Kai.
With the recent heat up between relations of the US and PRC a video like this is helpful to know what we're up against if war is unavoidable by the way I'm not biased against China I'm just saying if anyone has the means of challenging the us it's China so it's best to not be ignorant
@@rhythmray7429 The Chinese three letter designations are not used operationally. They were factory designations to identify a vehicle and are for bean counters.
could I ask where can I get the info on the color for the unit symbols. I thought blue is for friendly, red is opfor, yellow is unkown, etc... thank you for this very well made video ps it's okay not to put an H on the symbol for the Heavy Combined Arms Brigade
@@zheyuxiang5596 indeed, they have similar requirements and may even share similar pool of parts, but they very different tanks from a development perspective. It's essentially the reverse of Type-90-ii/Al Khalid and type-99 relationship.
@@gizhou3034 they're technically different tanks(that's apart from the fact, that there are two known configurations of ZTQ-15, and two versions of VT-5 as well: "early" and "production"). Different configuration, different specs, different weight, even different designation&role.
@@damolux3388 Obviously not 6, PLA has 13 group armies, about 80 brigades, of which 30-40 are heavy armored brigades, but not all heavy armored brigades have the latest equipment
@@infinitous_8610 Why on earth would China do that? Not in the forseeable future I would say. China has NEVER been known to occupy overseas territories.
I've seen sources that have the AD Battalion having : 8 x HQ-17 and 18 x PGZ-07 SPAAG (instead of 4 x HQ-17 and 12 x PGZ-07) which is significantly more powerful.
Battle Order : Thumbs up 2 your mechanized combat infantry unit videos. Have u a video on U S. Mechanized Combat Infantry units in Vietnam? You guys are the best !
Very nice, unbiased accounting of China's heavy divisions. The Chinese military is in a current state of modernization and change as it transitions from less of a Soviet Doctrine force into a force that is more capable of fighting the type of rapid maneuver warfare that we have seen in the 21st century. The issue for the US military is that China's modernization and restructuring runs almost directly counter to what the US military has done. During the War On Terrorism, the US military became lighter and smaller. The goal was to be able to deploy small, light forces that could respond rapidly all over the world. Trying to stop opposing heavy divisions would require a massive reliance on air support. The danger with relying on air support is that it is not always guaranteed, especially in combat against another major world power. The other problem is that every potential US opponent recognizes US air superiority. Therefore, the logical assumption is that these nations have all spent decades finding ways to nullify or limit the USA's advantage in the air. Ultimately, the US (civilians and military) need to view China and Russia as the high level threats that they are. The dangers of denigrating your potential enemies are manifold.
Do you have a discord or some platform to where people can discuss military tactics, units or weapon deployment and run war games or to test unit concepts?
![China's New Armored Brigades [Explained]](/img/logo.svg){kind=logo}
